Get Month Category

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety and idempotency are clear. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as what 'category budget' means, how missing data is handled, or whether it includes activity. It is consistent with annotations but does not go beyond them.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no fluff. It front-loads the core action and context, making it immediately understandable. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With a full schema, annotations, and an output schema present, the description is sufficient for an agent to call this tool correctly. It could mention the meaning of 'category budget' or edge cases, but given the rich structured metadata, the missing detail is minor.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all parameters (month, budgetId, categoryId) are documented in the schema. The description does not add any parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('category budget') with a context ('for a specific month'), which distinguishes it from generic tools like get_category or get_month. It is not a tautology; it adds the month qualifier. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, leaving some differentiation to the schema and naming.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_category, get_month, or get_overspent_categories. The description only states what it does without any context on selection criteria, exclusions, or prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.